Integrating an artificial intelligence chatbot in scientific communication: Do’s and don’ts

Q2 Social Sciences European Science Editing Pub Date : 2023-11-06 DOI:10.3897/ese.2023.e112023
Piero Pollesello, Zoltán Papp
{"title":"Integrating an artificial intelligence chatbot in scientific communication: Do’s and don’ts","authors":"Piero Pollesello, Zoltán Papp","doi":"10.3897/ese.2023.e112023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The art of narrative and storytelling in scientific prose is now considered as an integral part of any well-rounded scientific communication process. Hence, when the AI-driven ChatGPT facility was made available online many scientists wanted to assess this new marvel. Over the course of several months, we explored its functionalities and opportunities in the field of scientific publication and collected both positive and negative experiences. Among the latter, the most compelling example was asking ChatGPT for scientific references. In this short communication we describe dialogs in which we sought to steer the AI towards fact-based assertions while it continued to produce false citations of papers, abstracts, communication to non-existing congresses, etc. Through exchanges on the forum of the open AI platform we realized that other scientists have encountered the same problem, even when searching for patents and industrial property rights. Our recommendation is that the AI of ChatGPT would be instructed on the role and uniqueness of scientific paper citations. Moreover, relevant agencies should plan for creating and adopting policies to rule out inappropriate behaviors by AI in fields in which errors could cost (at least) loss of trust in science by the general population.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":"70 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Science Editing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2023.e112023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The art of narrative and storytelling in scientific prose is now considered as an integral part of any well-rounded scientific communication process. Hence, when the AI-driven ChatGPT facility was made available online many scientists wanted to assess this new marvel. Over the course of several months, we explored its functionalities and opportunities in the field of scientific publication and collected both positive and negative experiences. Among the latter, the most compelling example was asking ChatGPT for scientific references. In this short communication we describe dialogs in which we sought to steer the AI towards fact-based assertions while it continued to produce false citations of papers, abstracts, communication to non-existing congresses, etc. Through exchanges on the forum of the open AI platform we realized that other scientists have encountered the same problem, even when searching for patents and industrial property rights. Our recommendation is that the AI of ChatGPT would be instructed on the role and uniqueness of scientific paper citations. Moreover, relevant agencies should plan for creating and adopting policies to rule out inappropriate behaviors by AI in fields in which errors could cost (at least) loss of trust in science by the general population.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在科学传播中集成人工智能聊天机器人:do’s和don’ts
科学散文中的叙述和讲故事的艺术现在被认为是任何全面的科学传播过程的一个组成部分。因此,当人工智能驱动的ChatGPT设施在网上可用时,许多科学家想要评估这个新的奇迹。在几个月的时间里,我们探索了它在科学出版领域的功能和机会,并收集了积极和消极的经验。在后者中,最引人注目的例子是要求ChatGPT提供科学参考。在这篇简短的交流中,我们描述了一些对话,在这些对话中,我们试图引导人工智能走向基于事实的断言,而它继续对论文、摘要、不存在的大会进行虚假引用等。通过在开放人工智能平台论坛上的交流,我们意识到其他科学家甚至在搜索专利和工业产权时也遇到了同样的问题。我们的建议是对ChatGPT的AI进行关于科学论文引用的作用和独特性的指导。此外,相关机构应计划制定和采取政策,以排除人工智能在某些领域的不当行为,这些领域的错误可能导致(至少)公众对科学的信任丧失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Science Editing
European Science Editing Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: EASE"s journal, European Science Editing , publishes articles, reports meetings, announces new developments and forthcoming events, reviews books, software and online resources, and highlights publications of interest to members.
期刊最新文献
Introducing the EASE Interactive Checklist for Submitting Authors A journal veracity–diligence index Lists of predatory journals and publishers: a review for future refinement Article processing charges suppress the scholarship of doctoral students Bibliometric analysis of publications trends in Indonesian research institutions: A comparison of pre-integration (2015–2021) and post-integration (2022–2023) periods
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1